That was an insult aimed at the character of someone that disagrees with him. The metaphor was designed to do that more than it was to explain the issue. And for me, that's been many of the red flags that I've seen along the way. People talking about the inability of their opposition to understand because they're too stupid. Or too authoritarian or too religious. And then there's this technique that I see, shift to argumentum absurdum... then make a joke about it to disparage your opposition but not really make a point. Neckbeards might be better at insulting their opposition, but that doesn't make them right.

It’s not weird at all, you’re just upset that regular people can see through your jargon via metaphors and understand who has their best interest at heart. You’re playing the“just get vaxxed, I am an expert so just trust me because you’re too dumb to understand” card and no one is buying it.

If we ban metaphors you cannot call Bitcoin a “chimera” and communicating ideas through language becomes impossible. This is incredibly dumb or manipulative to suggest using metaphors isnt possible with Bitcoin. Seems like a way to make people think they do not understand things that they do actually understand as a way to disempower them.

It's a joke in the sense that you can't ban anything. But it's serious in the sense that all metaphors tend to be flawed.

You want to ban metaphors but not CSAM on the blockchain. I'll pray for you. 🙏

They don’t understand it well enough

“All analogies and metaphors are wrong. Some are useful” - heard this somewhere once. Liked it